Who does Marty Scorcese have to blow to get an Oscar?

[Gambers]

Seriously. WHAT. THE. FUCK!? Clint already had an Oscar. He didn't need another one. Is this a makeup win for Mystic River?

[Saruman]

The Academy is fucked. Even more of a crime was Martin Landau winning best supporting actor over Gary Sinise.

[MinimalistCouch]

Maybe he should direct a decent movie

[Carpicon]

The Best Director category isn't a lifetime achievement award.

He deserved to win in 1980 for Raging Bull.

He probably deserved to win in 1990 for Goodfellas.

However, he hasn't been deserving since. Including this year.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Gambers
Seriously. WHAT. THE. FUCK!? Clint already had an Oscar. He didn't need another one. Is this a makeup win for Mystic River?

By saying that Clint didn't need another Oscar, are you implying that the Best Picture and Best Director should not win?

I think you're confusing the Academy Awards for lifetime achievement awards, pal.

[Gambers]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
By saying that Clint didn't need another Oscar, are you implying that the Best Picture and Best Director should not win?

I think you're confusing the Academy Awards for lifetime achievement awards, pal.

I thought that both Million Dollar Baby and The Avaitor were both about equal in their artistic merit. I thought that some parts of Million Dollar Baby were stupid (Danger, anyone?) I thought the Avaitor was the technically more proficient than MDB.

[Toshirô]

I post on numerous message boards and everyone seems to be churning out the same generic response to the fact that Clint Eastwood won Best Director this year: "Scorsese got screwed again". How ignorant. I'm a large fan of Scorsese, and I would have loved to see him enjoy an Oscar on many different occassions. Namely the years of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and GoodFellas. But I truly think that, considering the opposition, Eastwood was the more deserving contender. Many people seem to think that since Scorsese is a great director that hasn't won as of late, that he should be awarded now based on his overall filmography, which is absolutely crazy.

The fact of the matter is that many amazing films come out each year that the Academy finds more deserving than the work of other directors. Hypothetically, there could be a filmmaker who makes 9 bad films, but 1 great one, sweeps the Oscars with his great one, but leaves some great directors (Kubrick, Scorsese, Hitchcock) in the dust. A director could produce masterpiece after masterpiece, but if he's not recognized because of other films from directors who maybe only produce 2 films in their lifetime, the aforementioned director could be stuck with a "Lifetime Achievement" award instead. Which seems to be the direction Scorsese is unfortunately going in. We just need one more great one, Marty.

[ChemicalRomance]

Oh. my. god.

People...just because he made: GOODFELLAS, RAGING BULL, and TAXI DRIVER doesn't mean that he's going to win out of sympathy for a film that obviously isn't his strongest.

I mean, let's be honest, was Aviator really better than Million Dollar Baby? I think it's too big and epic for Scorcesce, I'd rather see him churn out another movie about mob conflict than see Leonardo DiCaprio flying around in an airplane yelling.

You guys are looking for him to win LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT. Just because he didn't win, doesn't mean he got robbed. For GOODFELLAS, and the others, maybe. But for this? I don't know. Its getting ridiculous now with this robbed stuff. It's what he did THIS YEAR, not over the years that going to make him win the award.

And honestly, I think it's time we all admit that the Aviator isnt the movie that is going to win it for him,

[KcMsterpce]

I'll agree that Scorcese was dissed for his chance with GOODFELLAS, but in the end what should the Oscars really matter?

As for The Aviator (http://www.angelfire.com/film/kcmsterpce0/reviews/aviator.html), and for GANGS OF NY, I think that it would be better for him to win an Oscar for making a GOOD movie, instead of the mess that was this year's nomination.
It's an insult to give a winning statue as recompence for past losses. I'd rather just do without one.

He's still got time, as long as he's making movies. For those fans that really think an Oscar is the be-all end-all of moviemaking entertainment.

[King of Depew]

I can't believe one person on here thinks Gangs of New York shouldn't have won over Chicago. Gangs of New York is one of the best films I've ever had the pleasure to see in a theater.

Gangs should have won anyways. That guy will NEVER get an Oscar, it's pathetic. Mark my words, this was it. The fact that Kill Bill II didn't even get an original screenplay nom is a joke, nor Uma for best actress. Fuck the acadamy.

I bet Marty got the fuck out of here and shot back to New York, I didn't see one post-party shot of him or interview either. I don't blame him, I'd never come back to the Oscars again, ever. He don't need those fuckers anyway. There were people who protested in 92 that he didn't win for Goodfellas, a bunch of people like Paul Sorvino didn't show up the next year for that reason. Whatever.

[Ted Pikul]

On the plus side though he did win a BAFTA.;)

[HeavyFknMetal]

To answer your question, who does he have to blow, I believe it would hve to be the Weinsteins.

Anyway, I havent seen Million Dollar Baby, and I havent seen Finding Neverland so I cant comment on weather or not he deserved it or not. I will say however that just because he made Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Casino, etc., that doesnt mean he should be given the award this year. It would be and endless cycle of apologies if the Academy were to give awards for fucking up each year. Oh here Scorsese, were sorry about you losing to Ordinary People, here, take this one. Don't worry Clint, youll get yours next year we screwed Scorsese first so just make a movie next year and well give it to you then, assuming you'll be alive then. The Academy is fucked up and way to fucking political. I haven't seen Ray but I really dont think Fox should of won best actor. The only thing his acceptance speech was lacking, were tears. When you're voting on best director or actor or whatever, dont vote on your favorite, vote on which one was the best. If I were to have have voted last year on my favorite, Bill Murray would of won best actor, but the best performance, was infact Sean Penns.

[movieguy1021]

Originally posted by Saruman
The Academy is fucked. Even more of a crime was Martin Landau winning best supporting actor over Gary Sinise.

If by Gary Sinise you mean Samuel L. Jackson, I agree.

[Raoul Duke]

I was super pissed as well. Although I haven't seen Million Dollar Baby, and I'm sure it is a superb film, I just wanted to see ol Marty finally get his...Christ it's long over due.. I really thought the Academy would end up giving the best picture to Baby and give Scorsese the Oscar..But, anyway, it's no use complaining, it's done.

I'm sure Scorsese will eventually win an Oscar in the near future...I just really hope he doesn't just get a fucking "Lifetime Achievement" award, and that's that.

PS: The Departed sounds amazing...Leo Dicaprio, Matt Damon, Mark Wahlberg....And Jack Nicholson as the head of the Irish mob! It'll get Scorsese back into the the ol' mob roots, and maybe the Academy will finally give him something....Not that he honestly needs it, he's considered a cinematic treasure, and many think he should have won a bunch of times over.

[The Postmaster General]

Off-topic:

Martin Landau was great! I don't know what you people are talking about.

[The Postmaster General]

Maybe you should talk to Scorcese about this blowjob thing.

[movieguy1021]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Off-topic:

Martin Landau was great! I don't know what you people are talking about.

He was, but not as great as SLJ.

[BorderEevilIII]

I just wonder on HOW are they placing their votes?!?!?
- What They Personally Liked?
- Or who hasnt gotten ol Oscar yet??

I was hopin Marty get his cause it went to Clint AGAIN.....
No offense to Mr. Eastwood cause he got his last years.....
Come on the academy, spread the gold statue around dammit!:mad:

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

Originally posted by BorderEevilIII


I was hopin Marty get his cause it went to Clint AGAIN.....
No offense to Mr. Eastwood cause he got his last years.....
Come on the academy, spread the gold statue around dammit!:mad:

Actually Peter Jackson got it last year.

[BorderEevilIII]

Originally posted by Mr. Fred Krueger
Actually Peter Jackson got it last year.

he did? whoops on meeee :D

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by BorderEevilIII
I just wonder on HOW are they placing their votes?!?!?
- What They Personally Liked?
- Or who hasnt gotten ol Oscar yet??

I was hopin Marty get his cause it went to Clint AGAIN.....
No offense to Mr. Eastwood cause he got his last years.....
Come on the academy, spread the gold statue around dammit!:mad:

I get that way with sports teams and stuff like that, but I don't agree with the the ideology that "Director X should get the Best Picture award because Director Y got one a few years back."

[jeo4]

I love Clint Eastwood. I love Morgan Freeman. Hell, Hillary Swank is alright by me, too. Yet I fail to understand how MILLION DOLLAR BABY beat out any of it's fellow contenders, or how Clint Eastwood defeated Martin Scorsese. In fact, if I were to leave last nights presentation out of it, I'm still annoyed at the lack of recognition Martin has received over several decades. A little filmography:

MEAN STREETS
TAXI DRIVER
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
RAGING BULL
THE COLOR OF MONEY
GOODFELLAS
CAPE FEAR
CASINO
GANGS OF NEW YORK
THE AVIATOR

And this is the short list. How does the academy continue to ignore this man's genius? I'm just dumbfounded. It's their choice, I guess, but I'm leaning toward the opinion that a film has to be completely controversial and provocative in order to have Hollywood's attention. My examples:

THE HOURS
MYSTIC RIVER
MILLION DOLLAR BABY

And the list goes on and on. I'm not saying that this is representative of all eight decades of Oscars, but it sure does show a current trend. I just think that someone needs to give the academy a wake-up call.

[Shockwave]

Like i said in another thread, hes NOT going to win one. EVER.

If any other movie is even close its going to go to it.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Shockwave
Like i said in another thread, hes NOT going to win one. EVER.

If any other movie is even close its going to go to it.

Why?

[bigred760]

Originally posted by Carpicon
The Best Director category isn't a lifetime achievement award.

He deserved to win in 1980 for Raging Bull.

He probably deserved to win in 1990 for Goodfellas.

However, he hasn't been deserving since. Including this year.



Thank you. I totally agree.

[bigred760]

Originally posted by jeo4
And this is the short list. How does the academy continue to ignore this man's genius? I'm just dumbfounded. It's their choice, I guess, but I'm leaning toward the opinion that a film has to be completely controversial and provocative in order to have Hollywood's attention. My examples:

THE HOURS
MYSTIC RIVER
MILLION DOLLAR BABY

And the list goes on and on. I'm not saying that this is representative of all eight decades of Oscars, but it sure does show a current trend. I just think that someone needs to give the academy a wake-up call.


How was The Hours controversial?? For that matter, how was Mystic River controversial? I don't understand what you're trying to say there. I can see how Million Dollar Baby is pissing some people off, but it wasn't the most controversial of the year. I believe that award goes to The Passion of the Christ or Fahrenheit 9/11.

I'm just not sure what you mean with your statement.

[Shockwave]

Why?

Hes just going to continue to get shafted. In my opinion he deserved to win this year. MDB was great, but Aviator was the better of the two in my opinion.


Look at some of the movies the guy has done, if those got snubbed then wtf are his chances? Not good.

[boombche_stum]

I knew this would happen when Scorsese didn't win.

Look, I love him too. I think as movie nuts it's safe to say we all do. Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Casino, Cape Fear, Mean Streets.... I could go on and on. The man is a genius. But I still don't think he deserved to win an award last night. MDB was amazing in my eyes and deserved the awards it got. And Clint, while obviously not in the same league as Scorsese, is definitely a damn fine director. And he deserved his trophy as well. Scorsese shouldn't win an award simply out sympathy for the injustices the Academy did years ago.... he should win one when he puts out an amazing film that matches the calibur of his earlier works. Gangs Of New York, while good, was not the best movie of the year in my opinion. And Aviator was alright, but again I think it wasn't quite what it could've been.

Scorsese may yet win, but I hope it's for an amazing film and not because he deserved to win 15 to 20 years ago.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by bigred760
How was The Hours controversial?? For that matter, how was Mystic River controversial? I don't understand what you're trying to say there. I can see how Million Dollar Baby is pissing some people off, but it wasn't the most controversial of the year. I believe that award goes to The Passion of the Christ or Fahrenheit 9/11.

I'm just not sure what you mean with your statement.

I mean the plot, for one. Look at how each film turns out.

(SPOILERS AHEAD)

MYSTIC RIVER - Sean Penn kills Tim Robbins' character even though he didn't kill his daughter.

THE HOURS - Deals extensively with suicide attempts of three characters as a result of their medical and/or mental conditions.

In my own opinion, neither film was exceptionally good. Do you think it is simply a coincidence that films like this get nominated for Oscars? I'm beginning to wonder, myself. Of course, biopics are often Oscar favorites too, and I haven't had too many complaints about those, myself. Maybe it's just me.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by boombche_stum
I knew this would happen when Scorsese didn't win.

Look, I love him too. I think as movie nuts it's safe to say we all do. Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Casino, Cape Fear, Mean Streets.... I could go on and on. The man is a genius. But I still don't think he deserved to win an award last night. MDB was amazing in my eyes and deserved the awards it got. And Clint, while obviously not in the same league as Scorsese, is definitely a damn fine director. And he deserved his trophy as well. Scorsese shouldn't win an award simply out sympathy for the injustices the Academy did years ago.... he should win one when he puts out an amazing film that matches the calibur of his earlier works. Gangs Of New York, while good, was not the best movie of the year in my opinion. And Aviator was alright, but again I think it wasn't quite what it could've been.

Scorsese may yet win, but I hope it's for an amazing film and not because he deserved to win 15 to 20 years ago.

I think he and THE AVIATOR deserved to win this year, too. Much moreso than MILLION DOLLAR BABY.

[bigred760]

Originally posted by jeo4
I mean the plot, for one. Look at how each film turns out.

(SPOILERS AHEAD)

MYSTIC RIVER - Sean Penn kills Tim Robbins' character even though he didn't kill his daughter.

THE HOURS - Deals extensively with suicide attempts of three characters as a result of their medical and/or mental conditions.

In my own opinion, neither film was exceptionally good. Do you think it is simply a coincidence that films like this get nominated for Oscars? I'm beginning to wonder, myself. Of course, biopics are often Oscar favorites too. and I haven't had too many complaints about those, myself. Maybe it's just me.


I'll give you The Hours, but I don't see Mystic River as controversial just because of the way it ended. I've seen worse. I don't know why movies are nominated for Oscars; I like to believe that it's a combination of reasons. Maybe it's just because they're kickass movies in the eyes of the Academy voters. Who knows?

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by bigred760
Maybe it's just because they're kickass movies in the eyes of the Academy voters. Who knows?

I certainly hope so.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by bigred760
I'll give you The Hours, but I don't see Mystic River as controversial just because of the way it ended. I've seen worse. I don't know why movies are nominated for Oscars; I like to believe that it's a combination of reasons. Maybe it's just because they're kickass movies in the eyes of the Academy voters. Who knows?

So...there's no controversy in a man killing his childhood friend in spite of the fact some pissed off teen killed his daughter instead of that friend?? I realize Shakespeare wrote his fair share of tragedies in his time, but there was some purpose to them. This was just pointless. It was three assholes killing an innocent man and pretty much getting off scot-free (unless we are to assume that his widow actually does get checks from then on :rolleyes: ).

MYSTIC RIVER was bloody awful to me. I sat through it patiently and it ended like a long joke with a really bad punchline. I hated it. It was just miserable to me. That's why this subject keeps coming up. Martin Scorcese keeps losing in spite of what many feel are great films on his part. And the winning films aren't even close to the caliber of his. That's my opinion, even if it isn't in agreement with the academy.

[JCR]

Martin Landau over SLJ and sinise was the right call imo. Ed wood kicks all kinds of arse.

As for scorsese Should he have won for bull and goodfellas? Yes. But the avaitor? Nup, not good enough. I dunno why he's making these grand epics these days anyway, his smaller more personal movies were much better.

And I thought the academy was pre disposed against di caprio movies, because he threw a temper tantrum when he wasn't nom'ed for titanic. Which begs the question, if scorsese really cared about winning, why does he keep casting him?

[Succubus]

'The Aviator' may have not been Scorcese's strongest film, but I still find it hard living in a world where Eminem has more Oscars than Marty.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by Succubus
'The Aviator' may have not been Scorcese's strongest film, but I still find it hard living in a world where Eminem has more Oscars than Marty.

*Hides helmet in shame*

Why did I have to relive that thought?

;)

[bigred760]

Originally posted by jeo4
So...there's no controversy in a man killing his childhood friend in spite of the fact some pissed off teen killed his daughter instead of that friend?? I realize Shakespeare wrote his fair share of tragedies in his time, but there was some purpose to them. This was just pointless. It was three assholes killing an innocent man and pretty much getting off scot-free (unless we are to assume that his widow actually does get checks from then on :rolleyes: ).


**POSSIBLE SPOILERS - INVOLVING MYSTIC RIVER **
There might be controversy as far as the movie characters are concerned once they learn the truth. Yes, three guys kill off a childhood friend, but only because they believed that he killed the guy's daughter. They didn't know about the "pissed off teen." They were just putting justice into their own hands. You can call it gang violence, even, they're own little mob of gangsters. Gangsters are in half of Scorcese's movies. If vigilantes are controversial, then put The Punisher and Batman into the same category. I'm just not seeing what you're seeing.

[jeo4]

Originally posted by bigred760
**POSSIBLE SPOILERS - INVOLVING MYSTIC RIVER **
There might be controversy as far as the movie characters are concerned once they learn the truth. Yes, three guys kill off a childhood friend, but only because they believed that he killed the guy's daughter. They didn't know about the "pissed off teen." They were just putting justice into their own hands. You can call it gang violence, even, they're own little mob of gangsters. Gangsters are in half of Scorcese's movies. If vigilantes are controversial, then put The Punisher and Batman into the same category. I'm just not seeing what you're seeing.

I've never really seen it from this point of view, but you're right. Gangster flicks aren't all that different from this one. I concede. I still don't like MYSTIC RIVER, but to each his own.

[Misanthrope]

Originally posted by boombche_stum
I knew this would happen when Scorsese didn't win.

Look, I love him too. I think as movie nuts it's safe to say we all do. Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Casino, Cape Fear, Mean Streets.... I could go on and on. The man is a genius. But I still don't think he deserved to win an award last night. MDB was amazing in my eyes and deserved the awards it got. And Clint, while obviously not in the same league as Scorsese, is definitely a damn fine director. And he deserved his trophy as well. Scorsese shouldn't win an award simply out sympathy for the injustices the Academy did years ago.... he should win one when he puts out an amazing film that matches the calibur of his earlier works. Gangs Of New York, while good, was not the best movie of the year in my opinion. And Aviator was alright, but again I think it wasn't quite what it could've been.

Scorsese may yet win, but I hope it's for an amazing film and not because he deserved to win 15 to 20 years ago.

Agreed. On a more personal note while i admire the fuck out of him for doing so many good movies in the past, i think he is just senile if he thinks he can sell DiCaprio as an actual actor. DiCaprio belongs in fucking shit chick flicks as a pretty boy.

The Oscars rutinarely screw people over year after year, but if we want to see less screwed people we need to stop acting like rabid fanboys: He did not won On Raging Bull, Or GoodFellas, Or Taxi Driver, you people need to get over it.

[Shayde]

There have been a few times scorcese was robbed, but this year wasn't one of them. Actually robbed is too mild; robbed, kicked in the groin, and then urinated on about sums it up.

I wish he would stop casting dicraprio in his films, I hate that guy. For the longest time, after seeing titanic, i wouldnt go near a film with leonardo in it, but I can't not watch a Scorcese flick.

[bluesbrother965]

I thought Leonardo DiCaprio was good in Catch Me if You Can and the Aviator, I actually haven't seen any of his other performances. So he seems like a good actor to me, although from what I hear these performances are diamonds in the rough.

[The Postmaster General]

I saw The Aviator tonight and felt Martin was the worst part of the movie. Sorry, but the man doesn't seem to have the word "cut" in his vocabulary. He works with amazing techs, and picks amazing projects, but overall, I think his strongest works have revolved around some New York niche. Don't get me wrong, he has directed some of my favorite films, but after today, that's just how I'm looking at him. The director of some of my favorite films. I don't know if he is the big shit people make him out to be. He doesn't seem to have the focus that he once had -- the vision. Sorry, man, but it hurts me bad to have to say this about the director of Goodfellas.

[APzombie]

I'll tell ya what, he didn't deserve it last year. The best part of The Aviator was Kath-- err, Cate Blanchett and then Leo. It wasn't Scorsese's best effort.

In the end I give it ***1/2, Eastwood deserved it.

But damn, Marty really deserved it for Raging Bull, Goodfellas and The Last Temptation of Christ.

[krazy drako]

Marty has to blow a long list of people. First off being all the members of the academy. This could take him 2 weeks if he goes at a ball breaking pace.

Next would be Clint Eastwood, so Clint won't make a good movie the same year he does.

Hell, we should add half of Hollywood to the list too. If he blows all these people he will be a shoe in for the oscars.:D

[JCPhoenix]

Originally posted by Shayde
There have been a few times scorcese was robbed, but this year wasn't one of them. Actually robbed is too mild; robbed, kicked in the groin, and then urinated on about sums it up.

I wish he would stop casting dicraprio in his films, I hate that guy. For the longest time, after seeing titanic, i wouldnt go near a film with leonardo in it, but I can't not watch a Scorcese flick.

While I think Leonardo DiCaprio is a capable actor (Catch Me If You Can (9/10), anyone?) I also think Scorsese is doing an injustice to his own films by continually casting DiCaprio in all his lead roles - especially when there are instances when he seems so very much miscast. In my personal opinion, The Aviator (8/10) had some great things about it (Cate Blanchett, Cate Blanchett, and Cate Blanchett) and some interesting directing techniques but it also had problems - I thought another actor could've done a better job with the material in the second half of the film (while DiCaprio was far from bad, I've said and still maintain that the role itself was showy rather than DiCaprio being brilliant in the role) and the film was a bit of a sprawling mess.

Also, one of my (many) problems with Scorsese's Gangs of New York (6/10) was the sharp contrast in performances between DiCaprio and the brilliant Daniel Day-Lewis. And come on - casting DiCaprio in your next two pics as well (The Departed and Drunken Angel)? I mean, sure, he did the same with Joe Pesci and Robert DeNiro but they were born to play the roles they played for Scorsese. Which, for the most part, consisted of members of the mob. But still - it seems like he's just casting DiCaprio in every random thing he's making which is not such a good idea imo.

In the case of The Departed - I hope DiCaprio is not playing Tony Leung's part (aka the guy who goes undercover in the mob)...I think Damon would fit that role better. At least the rest of the cast is looking good - Anthony Anderson, Jack Nicholson, Mark Wahlberg, Ray Winstone, Vera Farmiga (sp?)...I seriously thought he'd yank Pesci out of retirement to play the mob boss considering how much Pesci resembles the original actor (down to the voice and height) but it's nice to see him make changes (like also combining Infernal Affairs 2 into 1 - I love 2 (which is a prequel) more than one so I'm happy about that...

In any case, back to the topic at hand - I liked Million Dollar Baby (9/10) more than The Aviator but I was rooting for Scorsese to take it cause I thought directing-wise, Aviator was better. But while he didn't get the Oscar, I wasn't that disappointed with Eastwood getting Director since I like MDB more overall.

But I also agree that the competition should not be judged on past films cause then it'd never be about rewarding a good movie anymore. Then again, it isn't really anyway, but the principle is that it should be about rewarding what a group of people feel are the best movies of the year. And on that note, I thought Williams even being nominated for Best Score (again) for HPIII was the biggest travesty of the Awards show and a prime example of rewarding for past works and ignoring some of the many great scores of this year.

And back to Scorsese again -> I think Departed has the biggest potential for him to nab a Director Oscar. Again, I feel the original material is quite strong (especially when combining IA 1 and 2 together) and that Scorsese and Monahan might just be able to patch up the film, fix things that didn't work, and at teh same time, introduce their own unique efforts into the remake. I'd rather they do some major departures rather than stick with the exact same choices as the original - that kind of thing is what could allow Scorsese to pull this altogether into a masterpiece and nab that Oscar. They're certainly on track as I hear the psychiatrist in the original film is the female lead - considering how it's been emphasized that she's a lead, I'm guessing she plays more of a role and perhaps is finally turned into the great counterbalance to the crime stories that I think the character was meant tob e in the original films (but ended up feeling like a throwaway character). We'll see. This year's Oscar race is going to be pretty exciting...as is the entire year...easily the strongest looking of year of the past 5 or so...

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Jesus, do you really think the Academy just gives Oscars to anyone they fucking want to? If they honestly didn't think he was the year's best director than they don't have to. It's already been established that Robert Redford didn't deserve his oscar and that Martin Scorsese got totally screwed over that year, so in a way, it just proves that the academy is incompetant and totally unreliable. I mean, this is the same academy that thought HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY was better than CITIZEN KANE.

As for Clint Eastwood, I'm glad he has two oscars, he fucking rules.

Marty will be remembered as a guy who got screwed over a whole bunch of times, so at least he has that.

[jeo4]

Yeah...Martin Scorcese, the academy's Susan Lucci. :rolleyes:

[Shockwave]

I mean, this is the same academy that thought HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY was better than CITIZEN KANE.

:) A prime example if there ever was one.

[Gian-Sergio]

I think we should be happy for Marty not winning any Oscars. If Marty wins an Oscar, People will start forgetting about him. I think Marty is much than the Oscars.

[wheresdonnie?]

I stopped caring when Chicago won all those Oscars. Marty's better than the Oscars, I watched Goodfellas last night and it blew me away all over again. He doesn't need it, everyone knows he's the bomb.